Would it be a good idea to have one language for the whole world?

Answer 1

It's been tried. Many a hundred "universal languages" have been proposed, but the best of them, Esperanto, has had only limited success. The nearest thing to a common language is English, with more than twice as many people knowing it as a second language as those who speak it as a first.

The challenge to any national language becoming a true universal, is that it carries "baggage," associations with the politics of the mother country. People feel they need their "own" language to preserve their culture, and they're probably right.

Answer 2

While having one language for the whole world can facilitate global communication and understanding, it would also come with challenges. It may lead to the loss of cultural diversity and minority languages, which are important aspects of global heritage. Additionally, implementing and promoting a universal language could face practical and logistical difficulties. A balanced approach that promotes multilingualism while also encouraging language education and understanding across cultures may be more beneficial.